search results matching tag: maestro

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (38)     Sift Talk (2)     Blogs (0)     Comments (38)   

The Weekend - "The Hills" violin remix by MAESTRO J

"Lean On" / Major Lazer

The First Noel

The Weekend - "The Hills" violin remix by MAESTRO J

"Lean On" / Major Lazer

Cậu Bé nhảy đám cưới

chingalera says...

so glad you hit the sarcasm button there copper-C, way to waffle and save whatever face you imagine you have_an apology would be the noble thing, simply hit sarcasm and downvote my sentiment-Yeah, I'm a real pervert maestro-

chicchorea said:

Swirley again...spinning...spinning....

This one meets your age requirements too.

Formidable Stromae

dzonny says...

today's lesson on the international music scene: this guy's name is Stromae (which comes from inverting the syllables of "maestro" which is a practice in French slang called "verlan" which comes from the inverted syllables of "l'envers" which, in French, means "the inverse") who, in this moving bit of performance art, recounts how quickly one can fall from being "wonderful" (fr: formidable) after a breakup. this video has ~30,000,000 views and he has 2 songs in the billboard top 10 France right now. talent. i'm going to get a beer. peace.

Ceremony ~ Nothing In The Sun

Clutch - Willie Nelson

Drafting Like a Boss

evilspongebob jokingly says...

jeez where did you trendsetters learn math? Obviously from a "school" or "college" and not from the tubes. Philistines.

None of you have taken into account the well known Lebowski Theorem which is a functional analysis that clearly establishes the baselines and relative variances of giveafuckness relating to the speed at which humans are travelling within the vicinity of large moving objects (Please refer to the 7th Kowalski Variance of the Lebowski Theorem if the large objects are stationery).

I think you'll find reworking your so called "equations" using proper interweb math - particularly in trying to reach some sort of proof involving videos from eastern europe - you'll reach a much more satisfying conclusion.



>> ^Jinx:

>> ^CaptainPlanet:
as maestro has astutely pointed out, you've errantly assumed this truck can full stop in zero time. Hurp de durp de durpidy pthhhhhhhhhhh
>> ^Jinx:
>> ^maestro156:
Seems likely to me that he'd be able to brake faster than the truck could break, and if the truck started pulling too far away leaving him exposed, he could coast on the shoulder till he can safely stop.
I'm not saying I would do this, but it doesn't seem all that dangerous. I guess the one thing to worry about would be road debris, since he can't see it coming.

I dont think its about who can stop the fastest, its about how fast you can start stopping.
He's about half a metre away from the back of that truck. He's doing 90kph. Human reaction time is about .2 of a second. Lets do the maths.
90,000m/3600s = 25m/s
25m/s 0.2s = 5m
He's going to travel 5 metres before he even starts slowing down. If that truck has to brake hard he will go into the back of it. Granted, his speed relative to the truck won't be very high but it would prolly be enough to send him arse over tit. at close to 90kph. and he aint exactly in leathers.
I'm not even sure he could stop faster than the truck. Sure, the truck is heavier, but it has 4 wheels, big thick tyres and a lower centre of gravity. Lets do the maths.
The coefficient of friction between road bike tyres and average russian tarmac is...no I kid.


No I didn't? I just assumed the truck would slow enough that he could go into the back of it. So ok, the truck travels 4.8ms, the bike travels 5m. He's now 30cms from the back of the truck, and only now is he gonna start braking. Assuming they decelerate about the same, and I'm not even sure you can stop faster than a truck on a bike, there is still a 3m/s difference in speed with 30cms of room between them. Like I said before, he won't be going very vast relative to the truck when he collides, but his wheels are still going to be spinning prty quickly and I'd guess that would be enough to put him on the pavement...or you know, the risk is large enough that I wouldn't want to try it.

And this is ignoring all the myriad other risks from travelling at 90kph blind. Maybe his attention is on somebody in a car with a video camera in the lane next to him, and suddenly his reaction to the truck braking is delayed...maybe a pothole appears under the truck. Or a puddle. I'd rather base jump than do that.

Drafting Like a Boss

Jinx says...

>> ^CaptainPlanet:

as maestro has astutely pointed out, you've errantly assumed this truck can full stop in zero time. Hurp de durp de durpidy pthhhhhhhhhhh
>> ^Jinx:
>> ^maestro156:
Seems likely to me that he'd be able to brake faster than the truck could break, and if the truck started pulling too far away leaving him exposed, he could coast on the shoulder till he can safely stop.
I'm not saying I would do this, but it doesn't seem all that dangerous. I guess the one thing to worry about would be road debris, since he can't see it coming.

I dont think its about who can stop the fastest, its about how fast you can start stopping.
He's about half a metre away from the back of that truck. He's doing 90kph. Human reaction time is about .2 of a second. Lets do the maths.
90,000m/3600s = 25m/s
25m/s 0.2s = 5m
He's going to travel 5 metres before he even starts slowing down. If that truck has to brake hard he will go into the back of it. Granted, his speed relative to the truck won't be very high but it would prolly be enough to send him arse over tit. at close to 90kph. and he aint exactly in leathers.
I'm not even sure he could stop faster than the truck. Sure, the truck is heavier, but it has 4 wheels, big thick tyres and a lower centre of gravity. Lets do the maths.
The coefficient of friction between road bike tyres and average russian tarmac is...no I kid.


No I didn't? I just assumed the truck would slow enough that he could go into the back of it. So ok, the truck travels 4.8ms, the bike travels 5m. He's now 30cms from the back of the truck, and only now is he gonna start braking. Assuming they decelerate about the same, and I'm not even sure you can stop faster than a truck on a bike, there is still a 3m/s difference in speed with 30cms of room between them. Like I said before, he won't be going very vast relative to the truck when he collides, but his wheels are still going to be spinning prty quickly and I'd guess that would be enough to put him on the pavement...or you know, the risk is large enough that I wouldn't want to try it.


And this is ignoring all the myriad other risks from travelling at 90kph blind. Maybe his attention is on somebody in a car with a video camera in the lane next to him, and suddenly his reaction to the truck braking is delayed...maybe a pothole appears under the truck. Or a puddle. I'd rather base jump than do that.

Drafting Like a Boss

CaptainPlanet says...

as maestro has astutely pointed out, you've errantly assumed this truck can full stop in zero time. Hurp de durp de durpidy pthhhhhhhhhhh

>> ^Jinx:

>> ^maestro156:
Seems likely to me that he'd be able to brake faster than the truck could break, and if the truck started pulling too far away leaving him exposed, he could coast on the shoulder till he can safely stop.
I'm not saying I would do this, but it doesn't seem all that dangerous. I guess the one thing to worry about would be road debris, since he can't see it coming.

I dont think its about who can stop the fastest, its about how fast you can start stopping.
He's about half a metre away from the back of that truck. He's doing 90kph. Human reaction time is about .2 of a second. Lets do the maths.
90,000m/3600s = 25m/s
25m/s 0.2s = 5m
He's going to travel 5 metres before he even starts slowing down. If that truck has to brake hard he will go into the back of it. Granted, his speed relative to the truck won't be very high but it would prolly be enough to send him arse over tit. at close to 90kph. and he aint exactly in leathers.
I'm not even sure he could stop faster than the truck. Sure, the truck is heavier, but it has 4 wheels, big thick tyres and a lower centre of gravity. Lets do the maths.
The coefficient of friction between road bike tyres and average russian tarmac is...no I kid.

Henry Rollins on the State of Music Today

Peter Schiff vs. Cornell West on CNN's Anderson Cooper 360

heropsycho says...

A. We have been running counter-cyclical deficits. You can say what you want about the "shell game", which I btw don't agree with as a characterization, in the mid to late 90's, but compare that to the deficits run post 9/11. There's a marked difference. Compare George W. Bush deficits of the mid 2000's to what Obama has done. When the economy tanked, deficits grew, not stayed the same or shrunk.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/include/us_deficit_100.png

I completely agree with you we have failed to run surpluses when the economy has been prospering. That is absolutely the case, but you definitely see swelling of deficits in response to recessions in the chart above. That's a Keynesian idea, even if it is shared with the monetarists.

B. Yeah, I'm sure. Granted, LOL @ Ballmer from time to time.

D. Individuals may be skeptical of the FDIC right now, but we're speaking of the influence systemically of the FDIC. This past financial crisis was all about a credit crisis. Part of why the recession occurred occurred was an eroding of available credit due to pervasive fear and mistrust, a lot among banking institutions of each other. The last thing we needed was a run on the banks, and that was very largely avoided. The FDIC was a huge reason for that. Had there been, more banks would have gone under, and banks still surviving would have been even more irrationally tight on lending. That would have been absolutely disastrous. There's little doubt in my mind we would have seen 20% unemployment.

>> ^bmacs27:

A. Lol at counter-cyclic budget deficits. I know they played that whole shell game with social security in the 90s, but other than that, I don't think we've really been running many counter-cyclic Keynesian surpluses. The other thing to remember is that monetarism is a derivative of Keynesian theory, so it isn't surprising that they have some overlapping prescriptions. I guess I would push my argument further by stating that Greenspan is broadly considered a monetarist, and he pretty much ran the economy over that interval. Teh maestro.
B. Heh, you sure about that? "I LOVE this COMPANY!!!!!!!"
C. I think we pretty much agree here without getting to wonkish.
D. My GF is in ING. It's now capital one, so she's likely leaving it. Pretty much I wish your average bank was much smaller than they are today. Also, I wouldn't be so confident in that FDIC insurance. The FDIC itself is in some dire straights. Also, they just moved all that bad Merrill paper into FDIC insured subsidiaries of BoA so that they could borrow against the deposits at better short term rates to support it.

Peter Schiff vs. Cornell West on CNN's Anderson Cooper 360

bmacs27 says...

A. Lol at counter-cyclic budget deficits. I know they played that whole shell game with social security in the 90s, but other than that, I don't think we've really been running many counter-cyclic Keynesian surpluses. The other thing to remember is that monetarism is a derivative of Keynesian theory, so it isn't surprising that they have some overlapping prescriptions. I guess I would push my argument further by stating that Greenspan is broadly considered a monetarist, and he pretty much ran the economy over that interval. Teh maestro.

B. Heh, you sure about that? "I LOVE this COMPANY!!!!!!!"

C. I think we pretty much agree here without getting to wonkish.

D. My GF is in ING. It's now capital one, so she's likely leaving it. Pretty much I wish your average bank was much smaller than they are today. Also, I wouldn't be so confident in that FDIC insurance. The FDIC itself is in some dire straights. Also, they just moved all that bad Merrill paper into FDIC insured subsidiaries of BoA so that they could borrow against the deposits at better short term rates to support it.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon